BCCI v. Cricket Association of Bihar
Quick answer: what is this case brief about?
SC held that BCCI, though not a 'State' under Article 12, is amenable to Article 226 writ jurisdiction because it discharges important public functions.
JUDGEMENT AND ANALYSIS
This Court held that even when the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) was not “State” within the meaning of Article 12, it was amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as it was discharging important public functions.
The Hon'ble court observed that the right of citizens to form associations existed but it didn’t consist of right to carry on such businesses or other activity and the State can impose regulations and other measures of control on the right to carry on such businesses or activity chosen by such a union or association so long as the initial voluntary position of the association remains unaffected.
It was held that for implementation of directions issued by the Supreme Court, requiring close monitoring and supervision, can be delegated to the court appointed committee.
{pg 1097, 1428, Indian Constitutional law, MP Jain 8th ed}